This one baffles me. Seriously, you will not find a kinder, gentler more honest person than John Olerud. He is not your typical major league jerk. This guy makes Mr Rogers look like a rebel. That doesn't make him right, but something is missing from this story - it just has to be. I can't imagine him building without at least a "wink and a nod" that the tree would come down - but if he did? Shame on him.

I understand both sides of the argument. What I don't understand was the lack of forethought? He LIVED on the property with the tree!! While he was building his CUSTOM home. If you know, with absolute certainty, that there is big, humongous, view obstructing tree (of the view you want to see) on the neighboring property . .. wouldn't you have addressed it earlier? Like immediately? Before you made your decisions?

Well, there may indeed be more to this story, but as far as I'm concerned the most telling part is already in there. It's the part about how Olerud is trying to guilt-trip this guy into cutting his tree down. And who's he citing as an authority?

Jesus Christ!

No, I'm not swearing, people. "Jesus Christ" is the correct answer.

Olerud's words:

I'm just making the point that if you're willing to cut down your own trees to maintain your view and yet you aren't willing to offer that to your neighbor, how is that being a good neighbor?

"The Bible says, 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and strength, and your neighbor as yourself.' That's Jesus' commandment."

Boy that's really the topper. Isn't that just the angel on top of this Christ-mas tree of a story?

How this Olerud dude could call himself a Christian out of one side of his mouth and say something like that out the other is beyond me.

Jesus was all about loving your neighbor, see? So that's why YOU should cut down YOUR tree to enhance the view from MY mansion. Yup. That's what Jesus would want YOU to do, neighbor. I'm sure of it.

How could a person possibly twist Jesus' words so much without having them snap back in his own face?

This is why I'll never be a Christian, folks. It's not that I don't want to be a good person and do right by God and all that. I do. I just can't bring myself to subscribe to any theology where people can interpret it the way John Olerud does while keeping a straight face.

And he's not alone on Planet Cuckoo, either. Look at what that other fool-headed woman said.

Just look!

Nancy Dammkoehler, a neighbor who spoke at the hearing, said the Oleruds are reasonable people and scolded Baker: "All they want is to see the top of the Space Needle. If you can't figure this out, boy, I tell you, you'd better find a different line of work, buddy, because you're not very Christian."

This lady must be another fat-cat "Christian" as well, though what good it's doing her troubled soul, I couldn't say.

My thoughts exactly, Kbear!! Even if there is more to the story, it doesn't change the basic message of cutting a tree down for a view. selfish. sad. especially given that the parties have the means to move/build where the view is already present.

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

–Mark 8:36

This Bible verse comes from a passage where Jesus is preaching to the people of Caesarea, and at this point in the story he begins making some explicit predictions about his suffering and death at the hands of men.

And that's just the thing about losing one's soul, see? It doesn't happen overnight, like one morning you wake up without it and you're looking all around, remembering that you had it on the day before. And you yell downstairs to your wife: Honey! Have you seen my soul?

Trust me on this, folks. Losing one's soul is a process that happens slowly, by imperceptible degrees. Like the proverbial frog in the soup pot.

Sure, there's stuff that can turn up the heat a little quicker. Money, power, fame . . . All that ego-stroking swag that Olerud's got. But as it happens, the poor and obscure lose their souls at exactly the same rate as the rich and famous. So what gives? There must be more to it than just having a lot of STUFF.

And speaking of moretoits, that's a theme that seems to be popping repeatedly here. As in . . . "John's a good guy. There's gotta be a moretoit here somewhere."

Well, there is a moretoit, actually. And you'll be happy to know that I've figured out exactly what it is.

Would you like me to tell you?

Sorry . . .

I will tell you this much, though. This thing with the tree isn't the first step John Olerud's taken off the Path which is straight and narrow.

The Clyde Hill Board of Adjustment ruled Wednesday night that Olerud's neighbor to the west must remove two trees because they unreasonably obstruct Olerud's view of Lake Washington and the Seattle skyline.

The board's 3-2 order is the first time the city has told a resident to cut down a tree under a 1991 "view obstruction and tree removal" ordinance.

[...]

An appraiser hired by John and Kelly Olerud said their $4 million home would be worth $255,000 more if the rare Chinese pine and the Colorado spruce across the street were cut down and replaced with smaller plants.

What got the bug up your knickers about John Olerud? Thats a little creepy. And since when was it cool, or allowed, to mock "retarded"? I find that to be the most offensive aspect of your rant. But it does show one's character.

Personally, I don't care whether it was John Olerud or Mother Teresa doing this. I'd still be lambasting them.

I wish that I was just picking on this Olerud guy. I really do. I wish that Olerud was just some kind of oddball eccentric and that me and the whole town of Clyde Hill were snickering at him behind his back.

But apparently he's not an oddball. Not in Clyde Hill anyway. In fact there seems to be a whole village of people just like him over there, and they've enshrined their folly in an ordinance that says you can build a mansion and then make your neighbor cut down his old trees so you can have a better view. As icing on this cuckoo-cake, they've even scrounged up some justification for it in the Bible. Something about "being a good neighbor." AS IF!!

OK, my language is offensive sometimes. Sorry. I'll try to do better. But honestly, I Wonder . . . if you find my language MORE offensive than the idea that someone could force a neighbor to kill two lovely old trees, I'd have to question your priorities.

What gets me is that the tree magnificent as it may be only lowered the Oleruds valuation by $300,000. Which sounds big until you see the Oleruds valuation would be $4.05 million with the tree up. Vs. $4.3 million with out it. For shame John O.

Since it does not appear that the trees can be saved at their current location and the suggestion for it to be moved has been raised by B-squared…What about relocating the Chinese pine and hopefully the Spruce to the Chinese Garden here in West Seattle?

Wow, so the whole beauty of snyde Hill can be chopped down to allow a few select homeowners to have a better view. Real forward thinking Mr. Bookey and company, I have a feeling you know nothing about plants/trees and have nothing better to do than nitpick....maybe try a Florida retirement home instead and leave us some natural beauty we all can enjoy!

Sorry to be so late to this discussion. Didn't realize it was addressed to me, and having no interest in Mr. Olerud hadn't clicked on it before.

I'm with Mr. P (DBP, that is)and K-Bear: a tree IS a view. What is this fascination with water, anyway? If you want to look at the damn water, it's not that far away, is it? Does it have to be visible 24/7? Doesn't Mr. Olerud already have a great view of the water from his friggin' YACHT?

It's also interesting that we seem to have two City ordinances in conflict with one another. It's no longer legal to cut more than 3 trees per year per property over a certain caliper, which is a pretty lax regulation, but one put in place due to the enormous loss of urban forest (70%) over the last 20 years. Then we have another ordinance that allows the massacre of huge trees to promote views? Bit of a conflict, I'd say.

It's possible that the Chinese fir could be considered a tree of "importance" or a heritage tree. Wonder if anyone has looked into that? Does Cass Turnbull know about this idiocy?

As for Jesus (or his daddy) condoning the cutting of the tree - isn't He supposed to have created the damn thing to begin with? Why would God want the tree cut down after going to the trouble of designing and installing it in the first place? Apparently Mr. Olerud thinks he needs a better view than God. Is that wise?

What? The Most Christian Mr. Olerud doesn't give a rip about how other people feel? Yeah, I'm sure that's in the Bible somewhere, too.

Do unto others . . . period.

Ah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-hah!

****************************

Lest we think that Clyde Hill is unique in its disdain for natural beauty, just look what this other little burb hath wrought . . .

A three-year battle over a tall tree ended Monday, as Art and Susan Wright’s massive red cedar was being trimmed to roof height in the gray and drizzly morning.

A neighbor in the Innis Arden community in Shoreline had complained that the almost four-story tree was blocking her view of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains. The neighborhood association agreed, deciding the tree’s height violated bylaws stating that nothing should obstruct any resident’s view of the surrounding area.

I'm sure the Good Folk of Innis Arden don't give a rip what the rest of the world thinks of them either. But I'm betting they'll change their tune one day . . . when their little bubble runs out of air . . .

If you ask me, and you didn't, it's pretty obvious to outsiders who look at it, the "prosperity theology" that took over Christianity starting in the 80's is fully manifested as a cult of greed and self-righteousness.

I have friends who have left their churches because of this. Their fellow congregants were more interested in keeping up with the Jones' and putting pious faces on their unacceptance of others than being truly good people.

I especially don't enjoy the "Members only" pricing of goods and services and gouging of the "unwashed" by these Christian business owners. It's NOT anecdotal, it's common. And it reinforces a societal cancer of selfishness and discrimination against our neighbors. (Ahem, Mr. Olerud...)

Having said that, I'm still hoping to find out definitively what Rolex Would Jesus Wear??